Charles Darwin..

[Lloyd Smale]

for the most part your socialist friends have already put math, history and about everything else that SHOULD BE TAUGHT behind pushing there socialist agenda on to our children. They not only took God out of the schools but opened the door WIDE to allow satan a front row seat. About the extent of there math is, a man take away three parts can be a women and you should be able to make that decision in kindergarten and your parents dont have one bit of say in it. Its turned our grade schools into hitler youth programs. 

Nor any math beyond addition, subtraction, multiplication and division as that's all that is in the Bible.

Geometry and trigonometry have roots in Islam and Hellenistic polytheism while Isaac Newton, the father of calculus, was a known heretic antitrinitarian.

We'd all be better off living a simple life without the complications induced by those satanic computational gyrations.

[ironglow]

For over a century? Really?  Cracks began to appear in Darwin’s ideas within a couple of decades as new materials were discovered. Over the last century much of Darwin’s original idea has fallen by the wayside so much so that referring to the modern synthesis as Darwin’s theory is not actually correct.
   
      So, are you finally ready to admit that Darwin was wrong?

  “Both leading positions”   There are two? One is taught  in science class; the other in Bible study.

"Leading positions"..Simply means according to the numbers of people who endorse either theory.
 ..And it seems that my statement stands, or do you dispute my conclusion?/quote]

[TrumpWon]

Interesting article on the number of true believers

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/how-many-creationists-are-there-in-america/

[darkgael]

For over a century? Really?  Cracks began to appear in Darwin’s ideas within a couple of decades as new materials were discovered. Over the last century much of Darwin’s original idea has fallen by the wayside so much so that referring to the modern synthesis as Darwin’s theory is not actually correct.
   
      So, are you finally ready to admit that Darwin was wrong?

  “Both leading positions”   There are two? One is taught  in science class; the other in Bible study.

"Leading positions"..Simply means according to the numbers of people who endorse either theory.
 ..And it seems that my statement stands, or do you dispute my conclusion?/quote]

Darwin was wrong in the sense that his theories were incomplete. The Theory of Evolution, however, has benefited from discoveries over the years since 1859. It remains the best explanation for how life has developed on this Earth.
Interestingly, the theory of evolution does not delve into the origin of life only its changes over time.
Your conclusion…..you mean the one about Darwin making the theory up so his relatives would appear more human?

[Dee]

For over a century? Really?  Cracks began to appear in Darwin’s ideas within a couple of decades as new materials were discovered. Over the last century much of Darwin’s original idea has fallen by the wayside so much so that referring to the modern synthesis as Darwin’s theory is not actually correct.
   
      So, are you finally ready to admit that Darwin was wrong?

  “Both leading positions”   There are two? One is taught  in science class; the other in Bible study.

"Leading positions"..Simply means according to the numbers of people who endorse either theory.
 ..And it seems that my statement stands, or do you dispute my conclusion?/quote]

Darwin was wrong in the sense that his theories were incomplete. The Theory of Evolution, however, has benefited from discoveries over the years since 1859. It remains the best explanation for how life has developed on this Earth.
Interestingly, the theory of evolution does not delve into the origin of life only its changes over time.
Your conclusion…..you mean the one about Darwin making the theory up so his relatives would appear more human?

Well, if you don't believe in God, I guess it'll get ya by until you come face to face with reality/God His own self. That'll be the Great White Throne He'll be sittin on, just so you'll know where yer at. 

[darkgael]

Interesting article on the number of true believers

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/how-many-creationists-are-there-in-america/

It was an interesting read. Thank you for the link.

[Dee]

What Darwin described is God's clock and that the Creation is still happening, never stops.
.

Could you point me to the scripture that verifies that?

[Mule 11]

At this point. I’ll interject my argument on the subject which means I’m somewhat taking a side. If? We evolved from monkeys. Why are there still monkeys? Why did they also not evolve?

[Dee]

Do you read old Aramaic?  There is not tense in old Aramaic. Read your favorite fundamentalist lines with that in mind.
.

What Darwin described is God's clock and that the Creation is still happening, never stops.
.

Could you point me to the scripture that verifies that?

So in your deflection, your saying "NO" you can't. Thought so. Thanks.

Now, if ya wanna stay with that BS that's fine, and I won't be surprised, but God says he created everything, and let Adam name em. So your pretty much callin God a liar,.

Genesis chapter 2 verse 7, God created man.i.e. Adam. He didn't mention any monkeys/evolution.

In verses 19 and 20 God created all the animals, birds, fish ect. I'm guessin that's when  the monkeys showed up..

In verses 21, 22, and 23, God created woman, i.e. Eve, and once again. God didn't mention anything about monkeys/evolution.

So TM7. Proceed at your own peril while considering Revelation Chapter 22 verses 18, and 19.

Words to live by. Psalms Chapter 1 verse 1 and 2. No mention of monkeys/evolution here either.

[ironglow]

At this point. I’ll interject my argument on the subject which means I’m somewhat taking a side. If? We evolved from monkeys. Why are there still monkeys? Why did they also not evolve?

  Maybe there are some half-evolved monkeys.. and they present themselves as Democrats..

  Nah!  just kidding..but the ones in Portland, Seattle, Minneapolis and St Louis..among many other cities in 2020, could have fooled us....

[Dee]

Dee...,calm down and don't get triggered.

All I said is there is no verb tenses in old Aramaic. It's all present tense and happening.  Go read your Bible in Aramaic, stop your past and future killing of God when it suits your prejudices. It's all now.

Darwin probably was a big jerk, but he inadvertently said the creation is still happening because God is still here at the controls whether he knew it or not.  Secondly, he tried to harness time, man's ancient bugaboo.,.....his theory describes time vis-a-vis the Creation Clock. Like when you were created the clock began ticking......now look at yourself.....old, bent over some, gray, sore, and argumentative as he!!
.

LOL, Calm down? Why would I not be calm, your the one skatin on thin ice with your "evolution theory".

You really should try a KJV Bible, and toss that AJV copy in the trash. The AJV version is mostly BS. And get that KJV in plain English, you know can't read Aramaic, you just spued that out cause you read it somewhere. 

[Dee]

Dee.....
Genesis 1: 1- 30 basically says God created the primordial matter in 6 days and rested on the seventh. Bacon's KJV never said that was it and creation stopped, although he used verb tenses common in English. Only a fool would be blind to see earth is in change, life forms come and go, new stars formed and old stars die ; and new souls created.

Notice that the Genesis passage neither says nor implies that no additional creations would be forthcoming, but simply that the Lord’s initial work of creation (see Gn 1:1-31 for details) had been completed. Common sense tells us that not everything God would create was created at that point. After all, each human soul is a later creation such as your own, since the soul is created directly by God at the moment of conception–it does not derive from the souls of the parents....right?
Creation is happening and to understand this is to embrace God. I don't think Darwin or you get this but approach the concept too pragmatically.

.

[darkgael]

At this point. I’ll interject my argument on the subject which means I’m somewhat taking a side. If? We evolved from monkeys. Why are there still monkeys? Why did they also not evolve?

Mule: The point is that humans did not evolve from monkeys. Humans and monkeys share a common ancestor somewhere in the distant past. Both humans and monkeys traveled different evolutionary paths.

[Dee]

LOL, and you deflected with "a theory".

[Bob Riebe]

Dee...,calm down and don't get triggered.

All I said is there is no verb tenses in old Aramaic. It's all present tense and happening.  Go read your Bible in Aramaic, stop your past and future killing of God when it suits your prejudices. It's all now.

Darwin probably was a big jerk, but he inadvertently said the creation is still happening because God is still here at the controls whether he knew it or not.  Secondly, he tried to harness time, man's ancient bugaboo.,.....his theory describes time vis-a-vis the Creation Clock. Like when you were created the clock began ticking......now look at yourself.....old, bent over some, gray, sore, and argumentative as he!!
.

    (For the purists amongst you:  Technically speaking, Babylonian Aramaic does not use a present tense.  Instead it uses a participle which when attached to a noun or pronoun, functionally is understood as the present tense.  Thus the conjugations listed here are technically not verb conjugations but merely matching the appropriate participles with their number and gender.  It looks like a full fledged conjugation because of the phenomenon of attaching pronouns as suffixes. For our purposes there is no difference, so I will continue to refer to this as conjugation in the present tense. In the chart below, I will show how the basic participle form: כתיב, כתבא, כתבי   is attached to the various pronouns.)

How different is Aramaic from Hebrew?

In brief, the main difference between Aramaic and Hebrew is that Aramaic is a Northwest Semitic language spoken by the Arameans while Hebrew is a Northwest Semitic language spoken by the Hebrews.

  Grammar

Moreover, there exist several distinct grammatical differences between these two languages. For example, the definite article differs between these two languages. In Hebrew, the definite article is prefixed to the noun as a he, whereas in Aramaic, the definite article is suffixed to the end of the noun as an aleph. Further, there are letter changes visible between these two languages. For instance, Hebrew words that include “sh” will be often formed in Aramaic replaced with a “t.” For example, “teqel” is the Aramaic spelling of the Hebrew word “sheqel.”
Conclusion

In brief, the main difference between Aramaic and Hebrew is that Aramaic is a Northwest Semitic language spoken by the Arameans while Hebrew is a Northwest Semitic language spoken by the Hebrews. Unlike Hebrew, which is a flourishing language, many varieties of Aramaic language are currently facing extinction, and some are already extinct.

[billy_56081]

At this point. I’ll interject my argument on the subject which means I’m somewhat taking a side. If? We evolved from monkeys. Why are there still monkeys? Why did they also not evolve?

Did humans evolve from monkeys, no. But humans are not the sames as humans from 5000 years ago either.  Just as dogs, horses and turkeys are not the same as their ancestors.  Selective breeding and survival of the fittest.

[TrumpWon]

My favorite is the bat. Leviticus tells us it's a bird. Evolutionists can't find fossil bats to show what it "evolved" from. Case closed!

[Lloyd Smale]

HUH! Ive never seen the words "primordial matter" in any bible. but i have seen it say God created animals birds and man. As to God manufacturing souls everytime some is born i call hogwash to that too. Your soul IS GOD living inside you. He is in everyone of us. It is eternal. It does not die when you die. If it did a bit of God would die every time one of us died. It like God always was and always will be. You come from heaven and unless you dont believe will return there one day.

Dee.....
Genesis 1: 1- 30 basically says God created the primordial matter in 6 days and rested on the seventh. Bacon's KJV never said that was it and creation stopped, although he used verb tenses common in English. Only a fool would be blind to see earth is in change, life forms come and go, new stars formed and old stars die ; and new souls created.

Notice that the Genesis passage neither says nor implies that no additional creations would be forthcoming, but simply that the Lord’s initial work of creation (see Gn 1:1-31 for details) had been completed. Common sense tells us that not everything God would create was created at that point. After all, each human soul is a later creation such as your own, since the soul is created directly by God at the moment of conception–it does not derive from the souls of the parents....right?
Creation is happening and to understand this is to embrace God. I don't think Darwin or you get this but approach the concept too pragmatically.

.

[darkgael]

My favorite is the bat. Leviticus tells us it's a bird. Evolutionists can't find fossil bats to show what it "evolved" from. Case closed!

So….you are closing the case because bones of an ancient flying mammal are not on display. That approach writes off many animals which lived and for which no fossils have been resurrected. Fossils are rare things. It is safe to say that MOST animals have not left fossils.

[Mule 11]

At this point. I’ll interject my argument on the subject which means I’m somewhat taking a side. If? We evolved from monkeys. Why are there still monkeys? Why did they also not evolve?

Mule: The point is that humans did not evolve from monkeys. Humans and monkeys share a common ancestor somewhere in the distant past. Both humans and monkeys traveled different evolutionary paths.

So, different types of apes hun?
I was told in school many times we evolved from apes. I’m not buying it...

[ironglow]

Interesting article on the number of true believers

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/how-many-creationists-are-there-in-america/

It was an interesting read. Thank you for the link.

   Of course, that would have been a non-partisan article..  That was discernable when they spoke of evolution and creation...placing  the term "creationists" in quotation marks, while not handling "evolutionists", in the same manner..
  Then the article goes onto play the race card..  Aren't we all getting tired of that game?

  Being a Christian, I personally believe Pew's conclusions are faulty..and likely done by persons with pre-conceived ideas.
  The Bible explains it, and if one does not believe the Christian guidance reference and doctrine (the Bible), how
  can they in all honesty, claim the title of Christian ?
 

[TrumpWon]

Pay attention to where Darwin leads!

[darkgael]

IG:

and likely done by persons with pre-conceived ideas.
  The Bible explains it, and if one does not believe the Christian guidance reference and doctrine (the Bible)

Preconceived ideas? You use that expression as a criticism. People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.  Look at your own trust in the Bible.

About the article linked by Trump won:

Of course, that would have been a non-partisan article..

“Would have been nonpartisan”….??

[Mule 11]

At this point. I’ll interject my argument on the subject which means I’m somewhat taking a side. If? We evolved from monkeys. Why are there still monkeys? Why did they also not evolve?

Did humans evolve from monkeys, no. But humans are not the sames as humans from 5000 years ago either.  Just as dogs, horses and turkeys are not the same as their ancestors.  Selective breeding and survival of the fittest.

Ya know, 100 or so years ago a man had to work 12 hrs a day 7 days a week to just scrape by. I don’t believe physically we as a race have changed in 5000 years other than selective breeding... I could expound upon this a bit.

[Dee]

At this point. I’ll interject my argument on the subject which means I’m somewhat taking a side. If? We evolved from monkeys. Why are there still monkeys? Why did they also not evolve?

Did humans evolve from monkeys, no. But humans are not the sames as humans from 5000 years ago either.  Just as dogs, horses and turkeys are not the same as their ancestors.  Selective breeding and survival of the fittest.

Ya know, 100 or so years ago a man had to work 12 hrs a day 7 days a week to just scrape by. I don’t believe physically we as a race have changed in 5000 years other than selective breeding...

I agree. 

[ironglow]

Well fwiw, the geneticist experts claim humans and chimps share close to 99% of the same genes.  One reason they like to test their new drugs and vaxxines on chimps and other primates; and why they like to brew their vaxxines on primate cell cultures. Some of these experts claim human-chimp interbreeding is possible; but I don't know about this _ _ although every now and then reports surface about human-primate chimera seen.
.

  Of course.. cats share 90%, mice 88% and cows at 80%..    Wow! only two genes different..never knew cats and mice were such close brothers ! 
 
   If a cat eats a mouse..is that an act of cannibalism?     

   https://www.factchecker.in/humans-cows-share-80-genes-as-home-minister-said-but-mice-dogs-apes-are-closer/#:~:text=Cows%20and%20humans%20do%20indeed,and%20our%20closest%20relatives%2C%20apes.
   

[darkgael]

This discussion is further proof that Christians should never allow atheists to teach their children.

   I assume you mean how the public school teachers went on for over a century, saying Darwin was entirely correct, and nobody was allowed to question the "theory" !

  The K-12 Christian school that I was involved with, made clear that our teachers taught BOTH leading positions.

  Guess we were more open minded...or if you prefer..more "scientific"..

i

Nobody was allowed to question? Errr….wasn’t there are court case regarding the longstanding criticisms of Darwinism.? (Scopes vs. the State of Tennessee). There were plenty of people who were (and still are) unhappy with Darwin and the subsequent development of the concept and mechanisms of evolution.

Teaching both positions? I wonder how much there is to teach about “intelligent design”/creation “science” beyond “God did it.”  I am aware that there are extensive collections of material, especially for homeschooling, that are supportive of teaching intelligent design. Ultimately, though, it all reduces to those three words.

[Lloyd Smale]

no matte how it came about or the time frame involved GOD DID IT!! Ill believe that till someone proves it wrong and some have tried for centurys to disprove him and none of done it.

[ironglow]

This discussion is further proof that Christians should never allow atheists to teach their children.

   I assume you mean how the public school teachers went on for over a century, saying Darwin was entirely correct, and nobody was allowed to question the "theory" !

  The K-12 Christian school that I was involved with, made clear that our teachers taught BOTH leading positions.

  Guess we were more open minded...or if you prefer..more "scientific"..

i

Nobody was allowed to question? Errr….wasn’t there are court case regarding the longstanding criticisms of Darwinism.? (Scopes vs. the State of Tennessee). There were plenty of people who were (and still are) unhappy with Darwin and the subsequent development of the concept and mechanisms of evolution.

Teaching both positions? I wonder how much there is to teach about “intelligent design”/creation “science” beyond “God did it.”  I am aware that there are extensive collections of material, especially for homeschooling, that are supportive of teaching intelligent design. Ultimately, though, it all reduces to those three words.

  Did you forget?  The Darwinists lost that trial, despite having the very famous Clarence Darrow, as their costly
  mouthpiece ?

[ironglow]

  A couple theories..
   
    Since life on earth is so complex, it would have taken far longer and many impossible hurdles to make the leap from  ooze to mankind, some "Scientists" who could find no adequate explanation for evolution, but stoill wanted to deny God, came up with the ancient explanation of "panspermia"....
   Panspermia was originally considered by Sir Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of DNA..
   
    https://www.thoughtco.com/early-life-theory-of-panspermia-theory-1224530

  Later he writes, basically endorsing the creation model;
   https://apologetics315.com/2009/09/sunday-quote-francis-crick-on-origin-of-life/

     Just think a bit...  Even if Panspermia were true, it doesn't change the need for intelligent design... it just changes the time and location.....

   Then there is Dr Robert Jastrow..astronomer, planetary physicist..NASA scientist.  Her are some of his conclusions..